Given the strange confluence of the new president’s first “presidential” speech and the growing scandal of Russian’s tampering with the election along with the help of one Trump advisee after another (Attorney General Jeff Sessions recused himself from the investigation just today for his involvement (Or was it his lying about his involvement under oath? It’s all very strange here in Upside Down and Backwards World), it is equally bizarre that the country is still debating about who this man in the White House is.

And now, for the first time since WWII, we find ourselves in a nuclear arms race. And he’s not even president yet.

Last week, President-Elect Trump said he was planning to expand the United States’ nuclear arsenal . In response, Russian President Vladimir Putin retaliated with his own saber rattling: “The Russian Federation is stronger than any potential aggressor,” he said. “It’s very important to note that it’s not a coincidence that I put it that way. What does aggressor mean?

As I listened to Donald Trump give his acceptance speech at the Republican National Convention last week in Cleveland, Ohio, the old saying the proof is in the pudding came to mind. Then it occurred to me: In this case, the adage is not quite correct. It should be the proof is in the recipe, not the pudding! For, if Congress actually allowed the Republican presidential nominee’s recipe for “curing the ills” of our country to be concocted,

On my last blog, as promised, I was going to take this time to respond to the Op/Ed writer for the Denver Post, Steve Lipsher’s, excellent article entitled Patriots or scoundrels?, whichwas written On June 30, 2013.

What Lipsher’s Op/Ed piece reveals is how prevalent politically tinged catchy phrases, simple minded and half-baked solutions are made in an effort to imply that what’s said captures the essence of what needs to be done to get our country back on the “right” track again.